2. Calculations by Menard using the PEST-II code show this is stable
to ballooning and kink modes up to n=6 with an ideally conducting
wall with a separation of 0.165 a. The consensus is that the
ARIES-ST steel first wall (thickness 1.5 cm) and supporting structure
will provide the passive stabilization to the kink modes. Neutral
beams will provide the rotation needed to stabilize the resistive-wall
mode. This is the design assumption, but needs to be quantified
that this is adequate for the report.

3. Calculations [by Turnbull?] using the GAT0 code show that the n=0
instability is passively stabilized by a continuous wall at
b/a = 1.6 (ie, a separation of 0.6 a). Neither the TEQ code nor
the TSC code has yet been able to give results for this case, and so
the consensus was to consider it to be vertically controllable,
based on the GATO ideal MHD results.
Control power requirements still need to be calculated.

4. It was recommended that the design be equipped with 50 MW of 90 kV
neutral beam power to provide some current profile control and
plasma rotation. T.K. Mau will quantify how much current this can
actually provide, but it will probably be in the range 1.7 - 5 % ,
solely at the edge.

5. Lang Lao will use EFIT to compute free boundary equilibrium for
this case. He will work with R.Miller to get possible coil locations.

6. V. Chan will oversee startup calculations addressing how much power
is needed for a stable bootstrap-overdrive startup of ARIES-ST.

7. We will keep the date July 24 open [12 noon EDT] for a possible
follow-on conference call if significant new results are available
to make it desirable. Please contact S.Jardin before this time if
you would like to have a conference call.

8. R. Miller posted a PRELIMINARY higher-beta strawman on his web-site
at http://aries.ucsd.edu/~miller/
It is called Case A 06/17/98. It was somewhat surprising that the COE didn't come down below 9.5 cents. This is being looked at.